Just grabbed these from work as it was part of an investigation. asmania joined all other Australian States and Territories in adopting a national set of road rules. Included in these rules are.

My part of a recent investigation included an incident from North, where a cyclist has been wearing dark clothing without any lights at 730pm (dark confirmed by Weather Bureau). gone accross and intersection, driver has failed to see cyclist and impact occured. Rider was travelling at 60kmh, driver was at 60kmh. Liability has been denied as cyclist has failed to be seen due to no lighting, non high visibility clothing. TT bike was valued at $7500

Included in the new rules are:

Two abreast bicycle riding is now legal on Tasmanian roads where it is safe to do so.Cyclists must ride in bicycle lanes where these are provided on a roadway, unless it is impracticable to do so.Bicycle riders in the far left-hand lane of a roundabout with two or more lanes must give way to any vehicle leaving the roundabout.

â€¢ Cyclists can make hook turns at all intersections unless signage prohibits hook turns by bicycles (Rule 35).â€¢ Cyclists riding through multi-lane roundabouts who travel on the far left line of traffic must give way to any vehicle leaving the roundabout (Rule 119) â€¢ A driver on a road with a dividing line may drive to the right of the dividing line to avoid an obstruction if the driver has a clear view of any approaching traffic; and it is necessary and reasonable, in all the circumstances, for the driver to drive to the right of the dividing line to avoid the obstruction; and the driver can do so safely (Rule 139)â€¢ A driver must not overtake a vehicle unless the driver has a clear view of any approaching traffic; and the driver can safely overtake the vehicle (Rule 140)â€¢ A driver (except the rider of a bicycle) must not overtake a vehicle to the left of the vehicle (with some exceptions). The rider of a bicycle must not ride past, or overtake, to the left of a vehicle that is turning left and is giving a left change of direction signal (Rule 141).â€¢ A driver overtaking a bicycle must pass at a sufficient distance to avoid a collision or obstructing the path of the bicycle; and must not return to the marked lane or line of traffic where the bicycle is travelling until the driver is a sufficient distance past the bicycle to avoid a collision or obstructing the path of the bicycle (Rule 144).â€¢ A person must not cause a hazard to a cyclist by opening a door of a vehicle, leaving a door of a vehicle open, or getting off, or out of, a vehicle (Rule 269)â€¢ Cyclists can not ride more than two abreast unless overtaking. When riding two abreast riders should not be more than 1.5m apart. This rule also applies on bike paths, shared paths and shoulder of the road (Rule 151)â€¢ A driver must not drive in a bicycle lane unless the vehicle is entering or leaving the road, avoiding an obstruction or right turning vehicle, stopping or parking or a bus or taxi picking up or dropping off passengers. The driver should not travel for more than 50 metres in the bike lane (Rule 153 & 158)â€¢ A bike rider must have at least one hand on the handlebar (Rule 245)â€¢ The rider of a bicycle must not carry more persons on the bicycle than the bicycle is designed to carry eg: no dinking (Rule 246) â€¢ The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so (Rule 247)â€¢ The rider of a bicycle must not ride across a road, or part of a road, on a marked foot crossing, unless there are bicycle crossing lights at the crossing showing a green bicycle crossing light (Rule 248)â€¢ The rider of a bicycle riding on a footpath or shared path must keep to the left of the footpath or shared path unless it is impracticable to do so; and give way to any pedestrian on the footpath or shared path (Rule 250)â€¢ The rider of a bicycle riding on a bicycle path, footpath, separated footpath or shared path must keep to the left of any oncoming bicycle rider on the path (Rule 251)â€¢ The rider of a bicycle must wear an approved bicycle helmet securely fitted and fastened on the riderâ€™s head, and any passengers (eg: child in child seat) must also wear an approved helmet (Rule 256). â€¢ The rider of a bicycle must not tow a bicycle trailer with a person in or on the bicycle trailer, unless the rider is 16 years old, or older; and the person in or on the bicycle trailer is under 10 years old, the bicycle trailer can safely carry the person; and the person in or on the bicycle trailer is wearing an approved bicycle helmet securely fitted and fastened on the personâ€™s head (Rule 257)â€¢ The bike must have at least one effective brake and a warning device such as bell or horn (Rule 258) â€¢ In poor light conditions or at night the bicycle must have a flashing or steady white light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from the front of the bicycle; and a flashing or steady red light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from the rear of the bicycle; and a red reflector that is clearly visible for at least 50 metres from the rear of the bicycle when light is projected onto it by a vehicleâ€™s headlight on low-beam. (Rule 259)

RobRollin wrote:Just grabbed these from work as it was part of an investigation. asmania joined all other Australian States and Territories in adopting a national set of road rules. Included in these rules are.

My part of a recent investigation included an incident from North, where a cyclist has been wearing dark clothing without any lights at 730pm (dark confirmed by Weather Bureau). gone accross and intersection, driver has failed to see cyclist and impact occured. Rider was travelling at 60kmh, driver was at 60kmh. Liability has been denied as cyclist has failed to be seen due to no lighting, non high visibility clothing. TT bike was valued at $7500

Without reading the whole list, is there any specific requirement for high vis clothing?? Understand and agree with the no lighting part of the decision, but high vis is an 'optional extra', or so I thought??

m@ wrote:This is the North of Tassie we're talking about; he'd probably just stolen the bike and was trying to make off with it without being seen

Must admit, every time I have to get anything reported to Tas police for work, more often than not they look at the footage and say "yeah, that's so and so, we will go pick him up now". Launceston has 100% strike rate on this from memory

But in saying that, the dirty theiving bastards of this world keep me employed

master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.

My thoughts, although the vehicle should have given way to the cyclist, the cyclist couldnt be seen in dark clothing and travelling at speed. It is not know if the road had proper lighting or how much visibility there was with lighting.

In a recent court hearing in Vic a Magistrate deemed a driver not at fault for hitting a cyclist, although the cyclist had a high vis vest, with a dark top, rear flashing light, but no front light. (cyclist was hit from behind) According to the law the rider failed to equip his bike with the requirements therfore driver is not at fault.

Thanks guys,Enlightening sentiments about where I live. Especially enjoyed the tar-em-all-with-the-same-brush approach. Bit like the sentiment expressed not so long ago about smokers on another thread

Anyway, I digress. Rob, thanks for the rules info. I was looking for those on the law sites but had no luck. Do you have a link to the specific Act?

-Grog

im_no_pro wrote:

m@ wrote:This is the North of Tassie we're talking about; he'd probably just stolen the bike and was trying to make off with it without being seen

Must admit, every time I have to get anything reported to Tas police for work, more often than not they look at the footage and say "yeah, that's so and so, we will go pick him up now". Launceston has 100% strike rate on this from memory

Grog wrote:Thanks guys,Enlightening sentiments about where I live. Especially enjoyed the tar-em-all-with-the-same-brush approach. Bit like the sentiment expressed not so long ago about smokers on another thread

Anyway, I digress. Rob, thanks for the rules info. I was looking for those on the law sites but had no luck. Do you have a link to the specific Act?

-Grog

im_no_pro wrote:

m@ wrote:This is the North of Tassie we're talking about; he'd probably just stolen the bike and was trying to make off with it without being seen

Must admit, every time I have to get anything reported to Tas police for work, more often than not they look at the footage and say "yeah, that's so and so, we will go pick him up now". Launceston has 100% strike rate on this from memory

Fair point, I shall clarify (certainly wasnt my intention to tar all with the same brush). At no point was I suggesting that everyone in Tas/Launceston is like this, just that those that do feel like they are above the law seem to do so regularly, as the police can more often than not reel off their name and record straightaway, just from a CCTV picture. Maybe it just means Tas police are good??

Apologies if I offended you, FWIW I actually like Tassie (apart from the cold, im in Hobart as I write this )

master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.

Grog wrote:Thanks guys,Enlightening sentiments about where I live. Especially enjoyed the tar-em-all-with-the-same-brush approach. Bit like the sentiment expressed not so long ago about smokers on another thread

One more generalisation won't hurt then... You northerners have no sense of humour!

harmonix1234 wrote:Forecast for Hobart next week is rain, sleet, ice and all kinds of hell.HTFU harmonix.

Why not open this subject up to include any rules relating to using roads?

Tell me why we have States, with State Public Servants, all around Australia, all trying to invent or reinvent the wheel. Why does a driver have to change their Drivers Licence to a Tasmanian licence after being here for 3 months? A person spending part of each year here, and part in another state, can be required to change their licence twice each year. Why not have one licence for Australia? Too many Politicians and State Public Servants might find their services no longer required?

That is just one small example of the duplicate services we pay for by having states.

One more generalisation won't hurt then... You northerners have no sense of humour!

Yes we do! We laugh at you Southerners all the time

LMAO

â€¢ The bike must have at least one effective brake and a warning device such as bell or horn (Rule 258)

Does a Campagnolo freewheel count? I frequently startle other cyclists, pedestrians and animals when I stop pedaling...

â€¢ In poor light conditions or at night the bicycle must have a flashing or steady white light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from the front of the bicycle; and a flashing or steady red light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from the rear of the bicycle; and a red reflector that is clearly visible for at least 50 metres from the rear of the bicycle when light is projected onto it by a vehicleâ€™s headlight on low-beam. (Rule 259)

Guess I should get a red reflector, although I don't ride much at night, and I always have my blinky on anyway. Wonder what the logic behind this is. In case the (light's) battery goes flat? In which case you are breaking the law already...

On reflectors - I believe it's a carry-over from the days of dodgy tyre-mounted dynamos that didn't have capacitors to keep them going when you were stationary; no doubt some bean-counter in my 'hood thought it would be good to keep the rule for redundancy without understanding that a reflector is about as useful as mamories on a bull

You can put reflective tape on the seat-tube or buy a lights that has a reflector built-in if you don't want to ruin your bike's sleek lines

harmonix1234 wrote:Forecast for Hobart next week is rain, sleet, ice and all kinds of hell.HTFU harmonix.